The Crown sought to qualify a police detective as an expert witness on drug trafficking indicators in a prosecution for possession of crack cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.
The proposed opinion evidence addressed crack cocaine consumption patterns, typical quantities held by users, and the absence of consumption tools as indicative of trafficking.
The court applied the Mohan criteria and subsequent guidance from appellate jurisprudence, including Sekhon, emphasizing the trial judge’s gatekeeping role regarding expert evidence.
The court held the proposed opinions were largely anecdotal, insufficiently grounded in specialized expertise, and not necessary to assist the trier of fact.
Given the modest quantity of drugs seized and the proximity of the opinion to the ultimate issue of intent, the prejudicial effect outweighed the probative value and the evidence was excluded.
